Dunes Construction Allowed On Jersey Shore Due To Loophole In

Law

August 24, 1991|By Jodi Enda, Knight-Ridder Newspapers.

SOUTH MANTOLOKING, N.J. — For more than two decades, Marie Tully and Joan DeLorenzo lugged snow fences across the sand that separates their summer homes from the Atlantic Ocean, slowly, laboriously shaping and reshaping the dunes that protect their dwellings from punishing storms.

This spring, a bulldozer shoved its snout into their handiwork, plunging through the carefully crafted dunes to make room for a sizable house that stretches toward the sea on the vacant lot between their homes.

``I am very upset. We built the dunes ourselves. And for him to come in and build something . . . I really can`t believe the township allowed it,``

said Tully, 70. ``The state would not even permit us to walk on the dunes. And then to allow him to build there I feel is wrong.``

State and local officials concur. Building on the dunes, they said, is wrong and dangerous and destructive.

But it is legal.

And in those parts of New Jersey where it is, homeowners, environmentalists and local administrators are powerless against the mighty bulldozer.

They are forced to stand by, they say, witnesses to the gradual and irreversible destruction of the shore.

Just ask Sean Kinnevy, the zoning officer in Brick Township, Ocean County, N.J., which includes South Mantoloking and the house being built between the Tully and DeLorenzo homes.

``We tried everything we could,`` Kinnevy said recently as he watched work progress on the 4,200-square-foot house. He said Brick officials searched for some state or township law that would prevent construction on the dunes, but found none. ``We don`t like it either.``

Like it or not, South Mantoloking soon will be stuck with a handful of houses - and one swimming pool - squarely on its dunes.

``Our coastline is being destroyed,`` lamented DeLorenzo, 53, whose own house fronts at about the same point that her neighbor`s new home begins to jut out onto the dunes. ``This can`t happen. It just can`t happen.``

It can happen quite easily, according to state officials, environmentalists and others who say unfettered development can ruin the Jersey Shore. And it has been happening for years.

That`s because New Jersey`s 1973 law intended to restrict shoreline construction bore a loophole big enough for, well, a 24-unit condominium complex, or apartment building, or even a hotel. Anything larger than that- in addition to any industry or any business with 300 or more parking spaces - requires state approval; but anything 24 units or smaller does not.

So the shore is speckled with such 24-unit projects. Throughout the 1970s and much of the 1980s, coastal development was relatively unchecked, polluting the ocean and creating a landscape so scarred that the Jersey Shore became a symbol of what other coastal states wanted to avoid.

At least half, and possibly as many as three-fourths of the developments escaped state regulation by squeezing through the loophole, said John Weingart, the Department of Environmental Protection`s deputy assistant commissioner for environmental regulation. Further, he said, the state permitted 90 percent of larger projects, though he said the law effectively compelled most developers to alter designs to meet environmental standards.

Former Gov. Thomas H. Kean and then Gov. Jim Florio tried to get a handle on growth by stretching the state`s authority to include developments as small as a single home. For a time, the orders protected environmentally sensitive areas, such as the dunes in Brick Township, from development. But they fell down in court.

The latest ruling, that the law applied only to large developments, was handed down in late December by a New Jersey appellate court and left Brick Township and other communities powerless to control even the smallest construction projects in their own back yards.

Some communities have their own laws governing development. However, Brick Township, which has a weak law, and others found that once the court had stripped away the protection of state government, they stood naked before developers.

Brick`s law prohibits destruction of the dunes but fails to define where the dunes start and, therefore, is unenforceable, said Kinnevy.

``We have to be careful because all the people who live on the beach are rich and can hire lawyers, or they`re rich lawyers themselves,`` he said. ``If there`s a way to get around the law, they`ll find it.``

The vulnerability of Brick and its neighbors could end soon. Legislators have introduced at least three bills that would close the 24-unit loophole. The more ambitious of the measures also would require the state to come up with a plan, almost a script, that would set the course for future development at the shore by mapping out areas that could handle more people and more buildings - and restricting construction in areas that could not.

``I think we`re losing the coast,`` said state Sen. John O. Bennett, R.-Monmouth, co-sponsor of one bill. ``I think we`re losing the coast to development.``